Many are asking, “Why are they holding this global warming conference now, after it is clear that the sky is not falling as promised?” An excellent question, that, and only I wish I had an exciting answer. Like maybe that that Charlie Sheen movie The Arrival, where aliens invade earth and are secretly modifying our climate, was prescient. What better explanation for The Donald’s haircut is there? Come to think of it, what better explanation for Charlie Sheen?

But, no. The dull truth is that it’s the same, tired, old story. Money. Moolah, the great spendoolie (you heard me: spendoolie), filthy lucre, the root of all evils, dinero. And lots and lots of it.

You don’t have to believe me. Believe German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who opened the conference by saying “leaders have to show they can deliver what they promised in Copenhagen – a $100 billion a year climate aid to poorer countries by 2020.”

If that isn’t confirmation enough, how about what China’s President Xi Jin-ping said? He demanded “that the richest countries need to raise the level of funding they are providing to poorer nations as part of a global deal to combat climate change.” He spoke of mobilizing “$100 billion each year before 2020” as a start. Only a start.

Related

21 Comments

In reference to your comment that all life, including politicians, is carbon-based, I think the evidence indicates politicians are silicon-based. As in rocks in their heads. As former Democrat presidential candidate and my village idiot former governor, Lincoln Chafee, said, “I’m a block of granite” so are they all. Hard, difficult to move, slow to erode, unaffected by reason. When moving they follow the path of lease residence or smash their way through oblivious to the damage they cause.

Maybe “climate change” is the correct term. After all, when your dictator changes and your country becomes poorer, that is climate change. Perhaps it’s easier than saying the conference is about crony capitalism and enrichment of the cruelest dictators on the planet. That’d be a hard sell. So the term may be accurate and people are just not hearing what is being said.

It’s not CARBON, it’s CARBON DIOXIDE. If you’re going to correct climate change to global warming because that is what it is, demand carbon be replaced with the accurate term carbon dioxide. Demand the science be followed.

Again, despots and dictators always use fictional enemies because they can control the narrative. Until human beings have high enough IQ’s and low enough EQ’s, there is nothing we can do. Stupid kills, though very slowly and painfully most of the time. And in most cases, people volunteer for the death. (Gary—I believe you have it nailed!)

President Obama’s speech was unintentionally hilarious. After outlining all the terrible things supposedly happening NOW — including fish swimming on the streets of Miami (you know it happens ALL THE TIME) he said nonchalantly, “But I think we can lick this thing.” Do these people even hear themselves???

Also heard you on Michael Savage (through the miracle of zeros and ones for hearing yesterday’s broadcast). I am bothered by your statement about carbon, as noted here. However, people on both sides pick up their favorite “sayings” and stay with them no matter what the accuracy, so I guess we are stuck with carbon/carbon dioxide, global warming/climate change, stop breathing ( a truly nonsensical one I cringe at). Anyway, for Michael’s audience, you probably were fine. 🙂

It’s actually tough being on the phone with Savage. I can’t gauge well when he wants to talk and when he wants me to talk. So I sometimes run on and so, to avoid that, try to explain things as quickly as possible. Accuracy could suffer. But nobody (sane) expects a dissertation in a five-minute interview.

JMJ: Wow! You are getting it! Now, if we want to talk economic development in poor nations, that would be a good thing. It is difficult to work around the despot government but economic development is generally harder to steal than outright aid. Not saying it can’t be done, but it’s tougher.

The sister of my ex-son-in-law worked in the foreign aid department of the Jordanian government. This is a (relative to the region) benign regime, as long as you don’t badmouth the dynasty, but corruption is the way of the world in that part of the world. I was told that American aid was simply turned over to the Jordanian government, whereupon it went this way and that through the conduits of cronyism. On the contrary, the Germans and Japanese sent financial officers with the euros and yen, and they sat on the projects the aid was supposed to fund and made sure the money was spent on those projects.

For fully corrupt regimes, I suppose all bets are off. “Aid” to the poor country becomes aid to the regime.

I think this is more about the power than the money, though it’s indeed about that too. Consider the power the regulators will have when they control our energy usage.

Perhaps the way to defeat this is to push hard, but in an unexpected direction. Global warming is a problem you say even though your predictions are bad? I don’t take you seriously, but maybe I’m wrong. How much CO2 did AF1 spew when flying to Paris for the 3 star dinner and chat fest? Make them live up to their purported concerns. Does anyone want to take bets on whether the energy budget at the Gore estate will be cut?

I read that the conference added 300,000 tons of CO2. I can’t verify the number, but it’s obvious this is a massive addition of CO2 by a group claiming to want to cut it. As I have read in comments elsewhere, have these people never heard of Skype?

There is actually high-def video conferencing equipment for this sort of thing. Absolutely no need to physically go, unless the real point is the 3 Michelin Star food and other sybaritic pleasures afforded to the very wealthy or powerful in Paris. Think DSK.

Leadership doesn’t care about the 300,000 tons of CO2, showing that this is indeed an imaginary crisis.

He sounded drugged to me. The Great Orator was sleepy, stilted, slurring, and seemed to have trouble focusing on the teleprompter. No confidence in the words, as if he knew they were absurd, or else he was drunk or something.